Talk:Rabbi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Assessment בomment[edit]

Assessment comment: Needs more references and some cleanup. shirulashem (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Pics[edit]

This article needs appropriate pics. See Commons:Category:Rabbis. – Quadell (talk) 23:02, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Recognition of who is a Jew[edit]

I removed the following from the page:

"Likewise, the North American Reform rabbinate does not accept the offspring of a Jewish mother and Gentile father to be Jewish unless raised unambiguously as Jews."

I am not a member of a reform rabninate, but this just seems to be a mistake - every denomination would consider a person to be born to a Jewish mother as 100% Jewish. If the Reform rabbinate does have such a policy, please provide a citation.Romabers (talk) 02:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Female rabbis[edit]

Is there a title for a female rabbi, like Rabbein maybe? --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:10, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't think so. Not in English, anyway. shirulashem (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest insertion[edit]

JoeCarter888 (talk · contribs) recently inserted two links here[1] during a spree of adding links to "First Things," a site he edits.[2] This is clearly a conflict of interest and inappropriate use of Wikipedia to promote a website. I removed the links, but Zsero (talk · contribs) finds value in them.[3] I moved the links to the external links section because the references section is reserved for works that were actually used for building the article. My preference is for the links to be removed completely, not only because of their origin but also because they are off topic for this article (Women in Judaism is a separate article). JonHarder talk 21:05, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Israeli Rabbi and abortion[edit]

This Israeli site: [JP] writes the opinion from Chief Rabbinate of Israel about abortion. In the article, we can read:"There is nothing more important than encouraging births - according to the commentaries - and it is our role to raise the awareness on the subject of abortions," Rabbi Yehudah Deri, a member of the Chief Rabbinical Council, said during the committee hearing. "Women must be aware - many women don't know that the significance of abortion is murder. The information that we distributed was a rabbinic ruling that abortion is murder, the halacha sees a fetus as a living person".

The black letters are mine, not from the article itself.Agre22 (talk) 14:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)agre22

Quality?[edit]

hello. Is there a reason, why this article is so bad? Or is it just lack of interest? If the latter, I may do some editing, eventually, but not, if the substandard quality of the article is the result of POV and worse. With thanks for an explanation, ajnem (talk) 10:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I came to this page to look up the term "rabbi" and its qualifications. This page reads much more like a political pamphlet charting the degree to which female and gays have made it into the ranks. Couldn't that be broken out into its own page? Currently, the page is difficult to read because of the interspersed political messaging. Thomas (talk) 16:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Section "Honor" is Repeated[edit]

The top-level "Honor" section should be eliminated. The subsection "Honor" should be combined or grouped with section "Authority", IMO. 77.126.46.34 (talk) 06:50, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

This is an excellent suggestion imo and I have implemented it today. The Honor sub-heading now follows the Authority subheading, which seems logical and correct. It seemed odd to me that the "honor" due to rabbis should be discussed before the reader learns anything about their history or functions. I hope that editors will expand both of these sections about which many interesting things could be said. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 15:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

Rabbis categories for renaming[edit]

Please note the following:

Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:52, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation[edit]

How does one pronounce this thing? Is it pronounced like 'rabbit' with the 't' assumed to be silent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.251.185 (talk) 08:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

No, it is pronounced like "rabbay" (like "I"). What you suggested is close to the pronunciation of "rebbe", but not precisely. Debresser (talk) 10:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

The word[edit]

I have undo Wavelength's removal of the word "The" in the header "The word 'rabbi' " because "Word 'rabbi' " sounds unclear to me. In addition please notice that the cited guideline WP:MOS#Article titles doesn't necessarily apply to headers as well. Debresser (talk) 10:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Question: Does a Rabbi have to be Married?[edit]

Does being a Rabbi automatically mean that the Rabbi MUST be married, in order to have fulfilled the doctrines of the beliefs? Should he be married BEFORE becoming a Rabbi, otherwise he cannot get married, similar to some christian traditions, or is this irrelevant and they can get married after becoming a Rabbi?

Moreover, shouldn't there be a section mentioning the specific "characteristics" or qualities/qualifications/achievements (i.e. specific knowledge, mastery of scriptures, etc), among other things that someone must have fulfilled before being ordained as Rabbi?

Please send me a personal message as answer to this question as well.

____Ἑλλαιβάριος Ellaivarios____ 00:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Any male Jew should have children. This is a Divine commandment (be fruitful and multiply). So he would have be married at least once in his lifetime, since one is not supposed to have children outside marriage. Rabbis are in no aspect different in all of this. In short, in Judaism there is no connection between being a rabbi and one's marital status, in whatever way. Debresser (talk) 00:42, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
What about gay Rabbis ? Implications of traditional values versus realities of modern liberal situations is worth discussing in the article. Rcbutcher (talk) 15:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
I think you have the answer in the terms "doctrine" and "commandment" - hard to call yourself a teetotaler and still drink. Contradictions. Like being a Jew and marching in a Nazi rally - something doesn't add up. Dogma just works that way.Thomas (talk) 16:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

All of this depends on the denomination. Among the Orthodox, a rabbi would be expected to be married, but not necessarily before ordination, because his time in education doesn't permit earning a living (except maybe in a kollel with a stipend); hence Orthodox rabbi could be single for a while after ordination and then get married; very odd if not married eventually. Btw not all males have to have children under Jewish law--there could be a physical/mental/legal impediment which exempts. Among other branches, it would be odd to have an unmarried rabbi, only because in a synagogue setting you will be serving mostly families with kids and it would be good to be a role model; but not impossible to be single, especially (young) assistant rabbis. Finally, in a denomination that permits gay rabbis, obviously he or she could be single or married. At least that's how I see it.Twelve Manhattan (talk) 00:47, 10 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

I agree with this. I'd like to add to this, and to my previous reply above, that an Orthodox rabbi can be ordained while still unmarried, but to be accepted to the office in a synagogue would not usually happen while unmarried, for the same reason mentioned above that a rabbi should be able to understand his congregants and be a role-model for them. Debresser (talk) 10:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Debresser for the comment. I am reviewing the talk page carefully as well as the Article, and trying to fill in some gaps, add citations and clean up some language. I also tried to upload a picture of a Chag HaSemikha from YU that I got from a YU newsletter but some bot took it down. Not a problem, really, can do without! Twelve Manhattan (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

What do they actually do ?[edit]

This article needs to discuss issue such as what Rabbis actually do : working day, duties, are they fulltime or part-time, paid or not, role in the community etc. How does a Rabbi get appointed to a community or temple ? Does he/she have autonomy or have to stick to a set of guidelines ? Rcbutcher (talk) 15:16, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

This is complicated. To be a rabbi, all you have to do is be made a rabbi by a rabbi. You then don't need to "do" anything. I know several rabbis who don't work as rabbis. One's a psychologist, one's a trader, one's a teacher, two run charities. But they're all rabbis. None of your questions have any validity for them. For those rabbis who do work as rabbis, the answer to every one of your questions would be "that depends". --Dweller (talk) 12:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
So what's the point of this article if it all just "depends" ? It needs to discuss this or it's pointless.Rcbutcher (talk) 12:17, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

The page now has a section on "Functions" with 12 sub-headings that may answer some of Rcbutcher's questions.Twelve Manhattan (talk) 15:58, 8 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan.

Thanks, that answers my question. Rcbutcher (talk) 06:50, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Knowledgeable about rabbis? Female rabbis? Transgender rabbis?[edit]

I am not knowledgeable about Judaism, but I do know that woman aren't allowed to be rabbis.

Can anyone that is knowledgeable about rabbis/Jewish law please comment on the Emily Aviva Kapor wikipedia article? Emily Aviva Kapor is a Jewish transgender male-to-female woman that says she is an ordained rabbi. Is this valid? You can also comment on the talk page Talk:Emily_Aviva_Kapor.

In order to be considered a rabbi in Judaism, what exactly do you have to do?

Articles about Emily Aviva Kapor:

Is Forward a reliable source for wikipedia? Do Jewish people view Forward as a legitimate Jewish magazine?

Thanks! 63.247.160.139 (talk) 07:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I can't help you much with your overall enquiry but I can tell you that "woman aren't allowed to be rabbis" is not generally true, only in the more orthodox parts of Judaism. See for example Julia Neuberger, Baroness Neuberger who is generally viewed as a very mainstream figure by many - though not all! - in the UK. Hope this helps a little. DBaK (talk) 08:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
The Forward is indeed a legitimate magazine, which WP considers a reliable source.
As for being considered a rabbi, the bottom line is really whether there are people who consider you to be a rabbi, and worth listening to.
Judaism has various different religious movements that hold to different positions on who can or cannot be a rabbi.
Liberal, Reform and Conservative movements in general see no problem with female rabbis, and their rabbinical colleges, such as Hebrew Union College, the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and Leo Baeck College in London have been training female rabbis and giving them ordination since the 1970s.
Orthodox and Haredi Judaism do not ordain female rabbis. Hardliners in that movement may in some cases not recognise anyone trained by one of the more liberal movements as a 'rabbi', and may even insist that the more liberal movements are not to be considered Judaism at all. Such as position may be seen as essential to defend faith and tradition; or divisive, intolerant and downright rude -- according to religious outlook.
I don't know much about 'trans' rabbis, but the first article you cite says that they have certainly been accepted and ordained by the Reform and Reconstructionist movements. Ms Kapor's religious preferences appear to be a bit more traditionalist than those movements however.
Being a rabbi because you have been blessed as such by someone who is themselves a rabbi is very traditional -- see our article semicha for a good discussion. But how strong that passing-on of authority is seen depends on how people regard you, and the rabbi that blessed you. (It's not a pre-requisite: there are and have been many orthodox rabbis who do not have a semicha, but who nevertheless through the respect for their personal authority enjoy the recognition of their wider religious communities to decide and to judge.) Jheald (talk) 09:46, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
I think Jheald gave a very nice overview of all the possible views of the question you asked. Debresser (talk) 22:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Rabbi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)


This article is only about Judaism, not paganism[edit]

I removed this text:

The Kohenet Institute, based at the Isabella Freedman Jewish Retreat Center in Connecticut, offers a two-year course of study to women who are then ordained as Jewish priestesses.[1][2] “Kohenet" is a feminine variation on “kohen," meaning priest.[2] The Kohenet Institute's training involves earth-based spiritual practices that they believe harken back to pre–rabbinic Judaism; a time when, according to Kohenet’s founders, women took on many more (and much more powerful) spiritual leadership roles than are commonly taken by women today.[2] A Jewish priestess may, according to Kohenet, act as a rabbi, but the two roles are not the same.[1]

That group is not Jewish. They offer prayers to Anat, Asherah, Lilith, and other pagan deities. They are even now are quoted, in an approving light, by pagan or witchcraft groups:

Asa West practices Reclaiming Tradition Witchcraft and blends her practice with her Jewish heritage and Secular Buddhism. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/shekhinahcalling/2014/01/19/thoughts-on-the-kohenet-siddur/

They simply are not Jewish in any way, shape or form. RK (talk) 20:13, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Neo-paganism has even been rejected by the Reconstructionist movement. These issues became a public debate in 1986 when the 4 December 1986 issue of the Jewish Advocate in Boston came out with an interview with Jane Litman, then a fourth-year rabbinical student at the RRC, who is quoted as saying that she has been accused of idolatry for making statues of Asherah, a Canaanite goddess, as part of an effort to "dig up women's spiritual practices from the past and see what resonates."

Rosenblatt, a journalist with the Advocate, reported that negative feedback from the original article led to a full-scale inquiry by the faculty of the RRC. The faculty stated unequivocally that it believed the invocation of pagan deities, male or female, to be outside the bounds of Judaism, as it has always been. It similarly considered the use of plastic or pictorial imagery in a devotional context to be regressive rather than progressive in the development of Judaism and saw no place for it within Reconstructionism. - The Jewish Advocate, Boston, 27 March 1987, pp. 66-67.

References

The Kohenet / Hebrew Priestess groups belongs under Semitic neopaganism[edit]

In the United States, the notion of historical Israelite or Jewish polytheism has been popularized in the 1960s by Raphael Patai in The Hebrew Goddess, focusing on the cult of female goddesses such as the cult of Asherah in the Solomon's Temple. During the 1970s growth of Neopaganism in the United States, a number of minor Canaanite or Israelite oriented groups emerged, mostly containing syncretistic elements from Western esotericism. Forms of Witchcraft religions inspired by the Semitic milieu, such as Jewitchery, may also be enclosed within the Semitic Neopagan movement. These Witchcraft groups are particularly influenced by Jewish feminism, focusing on the goddess cults of the Israelites. The most notable contemporary Levantine Neopagan group is known as Am Ha Aretz (עם הארץ, lit. "People of the Land", a rabbinical term for uneducated and religiously unobservant Jews), "AmHA" for short, based in Israel. ...Beit Asherah ("House of the Goddess Asherah"), was one of the first Jewish Neopagan groups, founded in the early 1990s by Stephanie Fox, Steven Posch, and Magenta Griffiths. Magenta Griffiths is High Priestess of the Beit Asherah coven.. See Semitic neopaganism RK (talk) 20:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Why don't you merge this into the section above? It seems to me these two sections are about the same ting. Debresser (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Two minor comments on this article[edit]

  • The second sentence gives a literal meaning for "rav" but there is no hint in the lead paragraph of why "rav" is mentioned at all. It should be stated that "rav" is a common Hebrew variant of "rabbi". Zerotalk 08:43, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Seeing someone called "rav" doesn't necessarily mean they are a rabbi. It is also common as a title of respect for any man. For example a death notice for a man in an Israeli newspaper will very often call him "harav". I think I remember this usage being mentioned on Wikipedia but now I can't find it. I think it should be mentioned on this page. Zerotalk 08:43, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Your second statement is simply false. When Other Legends Are Forgotten (talk) 15:56, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Zero. "reb" or even "harav" or a similar abbreviation are often used to like the word "sir" or "mister" in English. Debresser (talk) 18:44, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Cantors[edit]

What's the relevance of this article discussing them so often (20 mentions I can spot)? It's just muddying the waters. --Dweller (talk) 13:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Cantors are not discussed per se. It is always "rabbis and cantors", or variations thereof. Debresser (talk) 21:32, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, but why. They're not rabbis, so it's confusing. Strawman: the article wouldn't discuss "rabbis and cohanim". --Dweller (talk) 07:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
They go together. I personally don't find it confusing, because it is done over the board. Debresser (talk) 11:09, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Horse and carriage go together too, but why confuse people about which is which? You'd just have a small section in "Horse" that deals with its overlap with "carriage" and vice-versa. --Dweller (talk) 13:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Major movements[edit]

@63.116.31.198: apart form the fact that you should certainly stop WP:Edit warring, your explanation that the given source lists "three of the four major Jewish religious movements" is your own synthesis of separate things that the source lists, becoming original research on what the major movements are (which is not in turn supported by the source itself). My "ignorance" does not have any bearing on this issue. Please mind Wikipedia policies and guidelines when editing. LjL (talk) 22:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you LjL for agreeing with my reverts here. I would like to add that we are facing what I think are IP socks. Debresser (talk) 13:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I have not edited this article (as I know zilch about Rabbis), so you can take my objective opinion that the above IP is another sock of a lurking, POV, experienced named account. This analysis seems to confirm it. At least one of these IP has been [hounding] me, too ;). Zezen (talk) 22:21, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Lack of references in article[edit]

Can you please explain this revert Debresser? When I added the refimprove tag to this article earlier, you reverted it, and said in the edit description that "This article has 62 references. If you think any statement is lacking a reference, tag it alone with {{Citation needed}}". While I disagreed, as this article has a number of sections without references, I went ahead and added the citation needed template to the sentences in this article that are unreferenced. You have now reverted a second time, with the explanation that "Don't add tens of templates, add one." There's no policy against having both citation needed tags and refimprove tag. It also shows me your original revert was not in good faith. FuriouslySerene (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't throw good faith accusations around before you receive my answer. That is a bad faith assumption!
It is simple. Both things are not correct. 1. You can't tag an article with 47 (!) "Citation needed" templates. That is simply not normal. Especially in an article that already has 62 references. You should only tag statements that really need a source. 2. Adding the "Refimprove" template to an article that already has 62 references is also strange, and unhelpfully unspecific.
What you should do, and what I had in mind from the beginning that you should do (which disproves your bad faith accusation), is to tag those few statements that you think are likely to be contested. I see no reason there should be more than something like 5 of those, since with 62 references, most of those should already have been sourced. Debresser (talk) 21:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I plan to increase the amount of information on the Historical Overview section. In Shaye F.D. Cohen has a chapter in his book From the Maccabees to the Mishnah called “Relationship with Gentiles.” It is filled with rich information about the relationships early rabbis had with the gentile world that I think will be a great addition to this page. If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page.

(Jackfribes123 (talk) 22:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC))

Updating Page Info[edit]

I plan to increase the amount of information on the Historical Overview section. In Shaye F.D. Cohen has a chapter in his book From the Maccabees to the Mishnah called “Relationship with Gentiles.” It is filled with rich information about the relationships early rabbis had with the gentile world that I think will be a great addition to this page. If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page.

(Jackfribes123 (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2016 (UTC))

@Jackfribes123: Great, thank you for your work. GABHello! 23:11, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Adding new sections[edit]

I hope to reduce some of the gaps in this page by adding new sections that are responsive to some of the questions that have been asked. My aim is not to alter or replace what has been written so far but to supplement it with new material. Any comments from wiki folks would be appreciated!!Twelve Manhattan (talk) 23:44, 1 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

Thank you for your additions to the article, Twelve Manhattan. And for providing reliable sources. I can't speak for other editors, but please consider my silence and the fact that I haven't undone your changes to be my support. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 01:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Same here. Debresser (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Malik Shabazz for your comment and your support. And thank you Debresser! I know you have both worked on this page and I appreciate your support. There is a lot of good information out there. I hope to import some of it onto this page. There are ideas for 2-3 more sections, once I can muster the information and citations. Meantime, thank you again! I appreciate the support.Twelve Manhattan (talk) 14:52, 2 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

I am now in the process of attempting to answer some questions asked in January, 2014 by Rcbutcher--what does a rabbi actually do, he asked. I'm working on a new section for this page entitled "Functions." It should be available for review in my sandbox. Any comments would be appreciated!!Twelve Manhattan (talk) 20:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

This page needs a section on rabbis and the rabbinate in Israel--organization, functions, the Chief Rabbinate, courts, synagogues and religious councils, etc. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

I am not sure that is a good idea. This article is about the institution in general. We already have Chief Rabbinate of Israel. Debresser (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Point well taken. No need to duplicate what is already there.Twelve Manhattan (talk) 15:56, 8 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

Ner Yisrael under Charedi section?[edit]

Why is Ner Yisrael listed in the charedi section and not the Orthodox/Modern Orthodox section? NI is not charedi at all. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge it is absolutely haredi. Debresser (talk) 22:37, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
it's not. Chadetz Chaim might have converted to charedism (even though they allow college and colored shirts), but nirc isn't charedi.Sir Joseph (talk) 22:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Do you have a source for that? FuriouslySerene (talk) 23:57, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Do you mean if I have a source that a yeshiva that doesn't have a white shirt only uniform, gives degrees, etc. isn't Charedi? This is the issue with labels, were they to be in Israel, the school would be banned as you read the news in Israel where it flares up every so often when someone tries to open a school even "more charedi" than NIRC. Perhaps, I will grant you a new term, American Charedi and we should use that to differentiate what people commonly call charedim in Israel to the US and other countries. And lastly, do you have a source that calls NIRC Charedi? Sir Joseph (talk) 00:45, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
And now that I think of it a bit more, Chafetz Chaim is certainly not charedi. (I was thinking of the Brooklyn branch being Charedi, but that is not the Chafetz Chaim yeshiva) They define not charedi so much so that there is a generalization of someone being a "chafetz chaim boy" which is distinct from being Charedi. Both should be moved to the Orthodox section. And again, no source that CC is charedi. Sir Joseph (talk) 01:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Adam S. Ferziger, in Beyond Sectarianism: The Realignment of American Orthodox Judaism (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2015), p. 214, says Ner Israel and its community are "more moderate than" other Haredi strongholds and continues, "That said, Ner Israel is still very much seen as part of the Haredi world..." although in the vanguard of new initiatives in that world which are then adopted by other yeshivahs, like Lakewood. He would seem to be arguing for a brand of American Haredi-ism. Don't know if that's the kind of source that is wanted here.Twelve Manhattan (talk) 04:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan
Based on the Wikipedia article Yeshivas Ner Yisroel and on my personal conversations with students, I think Ner Yisroel is haredi. Debresser (talk) 10:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Then again, Wikipedia is not a RS nor is Debresser. Even assuming the NIRC claim, where is the source for Chafetz Chaim? Sir Joseph (talk) 14:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
And yes, haredi in Israel is in general stricter than in America. Even in Israel there are differences between haredi in haredi cities or in non-haredi cities. Debresser (talk) 10:58, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
And that should be reflected in this and in the Haredi article. Sir Joseph (talk) 14:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Twelve Manhattan, that is helpful. Unless Sir Joseph has a source beyond his own personal knowledge, there's no reason to change how Ner Yisroel is characterized. FuriouslySerene (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
What about Chafetz Chaim? Sir Joseph (talk) 17:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I'm not aware of a reliable source that does not consider them Haredi, but please feel free to share your sources here. Otherwise, it's just original research. FuriouslySerene (talk) 17:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Please show your source considering them charedi as opposed to Orthodox. Otherwise it's just OR to include them in Charedi section. And again, if you consider NIRC and CC charedi, what do you consider an Israeli Charedi? It is ludicrous to call a Chafetz Chaim student a charedi. Sir Joseph (talk) 17:23, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Since when is Haredi Judaism not part of Orthodox Judaism? You might want to read the Haredi Judaism page. FuriouslySerene (talk) 20:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Did I say that? Look at the page. There is an Orthodox/Modern Orthodox section and then a Charedi section. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Yes you did, you said "charedi as opposed to Orthodox." If a person is Haredi, they are also Orthodox. FuriouslySerene (talk) 21:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
As I said, if you actually look at this article, there are two sections, Orthodox and Charedi. While you may nitpick on language I think everyone else understood what I meant. Sir Joseph (talk) 21:10, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't think that was quite as clear as you think it was. I think you're suggesting that there is a group of Jews who are "plain Orthodox." While that's an interesting theory, it's not recognized in any reliable source I'm aware of. It's also pretty confusing for characterization purposes. Please see Orthodox Judaism#Streams of Orthodoxy for a list of Orthodox groups. FuriouslySerene (talk) 21:27, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Then you must not be as knowledgeable on this subject as you think. Charedi Jews are a subset of Orthodox Jews. People can be plain Orthodox Jews if their not Modern or Charedi, after all, Charedi is often-times called Ultra-Orthodox. And again, Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. I mean, all you have to do is google Orthodox Jew and look at the books, for example there is one book titled, "Orthodox Jews in America" and in the examples it cites, it doesn't go into the subsets. After all, the Charedi subset is most often applied to Israeli Jews and it's only fairly recently that people apply it to American/World Jews. Most other Jews that are Orthodox are just plain Orthodox. See also here: Many Orthodox consider these labels inexact and oversimplified, and in fact, some Orthodox Jews would chafe at the implication that they might possibly fit neatly into any one of these categories. on page 13. Sir Joseph (talk) 21:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Our friend, Adam Ferziger, discusses CC on pp. 162-164 of his book (cited above) and states it has a "unique place among Haredi yeshivas" for its masters program in education, modern attire, and public service for students (serving in Hatzolah and so forth). So while some might write CC out of the Haredi camp for its departures, other mainstream authors will deem it unique within that camp for these very features. The latter I believe is the better view. Btw can anyone say what a CC student would call himself and his roshei yeshiva--Modern Orthodox or haredi? Twelve Manhattan (talk) 20:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan
They would be called just plain Orthodox. I spent time in a CC affiliate and I don't think anyone there would ever be classified as Charedi. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Pictures of rabbis[edit]

Quadell suggested in 2009 that the page would benefit from appropriate pictures. As the text has gotten longer, I agree for both aesthetic and pedagogic reasons. Pictures of rabbis that show the variety of rabbis, by movement, period, gender, and dress, can illustrate at a glance what the very long blocks of texts state--that there are different movements and persuasions and they are producing rabbis of different types.

Query: would anyone find it offensive e.g. to place a picture of a woman Reform rabbi next to a picture of a Hasidic or Haredi rabbi? Would this violate some sort of taboo or sensitivity? Would this "be giving legitimacy" to all strains of Judaism in a manner some think is not kosher?Twelve Manhattan (talk) 15:05, 15 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

Ha ha. Apart from that, I think this article is about the institution, not about any individual. Unless there was an individual who changed the content of what it means to be a rabbi. I could live with one select example, but think that a gallery is not a good idea. Even if only to avoid the perpetual question, whom to have in the gallery, and whom not to have in the gallery. :) Debresser (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your response Debresser. If interested, please take a look at the following pages and their galleries: Minister (Christianity)--2 galleries; Nun--2 galleries; Clergy--1 gallery; Imam--2 galleries; Mufti -- 1 gallery. All very nice, I might add. The suggestion that Rabbi because it's an "institution" should not have a gallery would appear not to be borne out by best practices on wiki as demonstrated by these pages. It makes Rabbi an outlier with a deficiency imo that can easily be fixed.

An answer to the "perpetual question" whom to include is, let the wikipedians decide. A gallery can be added to. Be bold. I doubt the gallery will become too large and if it did, it could be dealt with when it happens.

If there is a legitimate disagreement about this, we should err on the side of more information being provided on the page, including visual information, not less, I think. I certainly take your point on not putting the gallery in the middle of a section; can you suggest a better position for it on the page?Twelve Manhattan (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

I would be ok with Rabbi Sacks, he's a distinguished rabbi and was the Chief Rabbi of the UK. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sir Joseph. Do you have access to my Sandbox (I'm a newbie and not sure how everything works). On my Sandbox you will see the gallery of rabbis I posted on the Rabbi page and that deBesser deleted. It has a picture of Rabbi Sacks. Let me know what you think. All the best. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 19:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

I would be OK with the following as descriptive of rabbi. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:09, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Interesting. I notice the Reform woman rabbi is absent along with the Orthodox Rabbanit. What is your thinking for not having their pictures in the gallery? Also the Lubavitcher rebbe is absent. Same question. Thanks for responding! Twelve Manhattan (talk) 16:44, 17 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

I took out the reform ones because they are not famous or notable. Geiger is there to represent Reform and Schechter is there to represent conservative. I took out the Lubavitcher Rebbe because we already have orthodox/ultra orthodox representation. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:50, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
I wouldn't agree that famous and/or notable are the correct criteria. It's supposed to be a cross section of rabbinic types. It's supposed to represent what the rabbinate looks like. Btw all the ones included have wiki pages--and are famous and notable in their own right--such as the first Reform woman rabbi to have a synagogue in Israel, the first Orthodox rabbanit. Further, given the newness of women rabbis and relatively small numbers, I'm not sure they've had the time yet to achieve fame.
If the gallery doesn't look like the rabbinate today, it doesn't serve its function. I can see adding to the gallery--such as your suggestion to include Rabbi Sacks--but not deleting rabbis (with wiki pages, no less!) whom some feel should be included. More, not less. To give a better picture of what the rabbinate is. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan
I agree somewhat, but we can't include everybody, it will make the gallery too large, so we have to narrow it down. As an aside, it might be better to continue this discussion on the talk page of the article. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Here is the gallery I am proposing--it includes all of the rabbis in your gallery plus Rabbi Kinneret Shiryon, a reform woman rabbi in Israel, the first with her own synagogue; Rabbanit Malke Bina, an orthodox woman rabbanit; and Rabbi Mark Wildes, a modern activist rabbi. Btw each of these persons has a wiki page of their own, which does two things: it allows people to follow up on their bios, and indicates a certain degree of notoriety (importance). As for Rabbi Schneerson, in my mind we need to show a Hassidic rabbi; whether it's him or someone else is not crucial.

Bottom line--the point of the gallery is to portray a representative sampling of the variety of rabbinic types, which the current page does not do. In doing so, the gallery should strive not to push any polemical or denominational line, either by inclusion or omission, but to be representative of rabbinic types, broadly defined. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 16:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan

(edit conflict) : I remain opposed to a gallery, for the reason I stated before, that it will lead to unending discussion who should and who shouldn't be in it. Please note that this is one of the reasons that picture collates were removed from ethic infoboxes.
I am firmly opposed to the picture of any rabbi who doesn't look like a rabbi. Form the collection above, only two are distinctly recognizable as rabbis: Kook and Yosef. Debresser (talk) 16:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Add the Lubavitcher rabbi in the second proposal. Debresser (talk) 16:09, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
I always welcome your comments Debresser but in this case I am a little mystified. Can you explain what it means to "look like a rabbi"? Do you have a reliable source for this? And is it true that in your opinion Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zt"l does not look like a rabbi, and his photograph would not be a suitable illustration for this page? I could ask the same question about any of the pics you object to, but I'll confine it to the Rav for now. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 19:26, 21 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan
Please explain what you mean. Do I have a reliable source for what?
Yes, I think that only those three I mentioned are universally recognizable as rabbis. Maybe I am wrong, but I think that a survey is likely to confirm my opinion. Feel free to do a small survey for yourself, let's say on Facebook. Debresser (talk) 20:26, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Again, this is just showing your bias. Rabbi Sacks looks rabbinical and is very recognizable as being the former Chief Rabbi of the UK. Sir Joseph (talk) 23:54, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Why so negative, "bias"? In any case, I don't think he looks like a rabbi all that much. Just a man with a nice beard. He and Mandy Patinkin look very much alike. The latter is not a rabbi, however. I think any claim to the opposite is factually incorrect, and only indicative of POVs.
I think it is time for broader input, and my opinion remains that for this reason and in order to avoid endless discussions about whom to include we should have no picture at all. If there would be universal agreement about 1 - 3 rabbis that is fine with me, but I doubt that is realistic. Debresser (talk) 10:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I am inclined to agree with Sir Joseph here. Debresser, I was asking for a reliable source for the concept of "looking like a rabbi," as well as the idea that there is "universal recognition" of what a rabbi "looks like." I find the notion that neither Rabbi Sachs nor Rabbi Soloveitchik zt'l "look like rabbis" untenable, just to mention two you exclude from that category. Btw I am asking out of curiosity, to try to understand your position; I am not asking because I believe that "looking like a rabbi" is the criterion that should govern the gallery on this page. I don't believe that. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 16:50, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan
Well, such is my opinion. Everything is relative, I guess. I would be very interested in seeing the results of a survey about this. Among non-Jews would be best, IMHO.
But whether you agree or disagree with me, the fact remains that the question, and the question of which rabbis to include in general, will be disputable, and I strongly believe we should avoid all that by not including any photos, or just 1 or 2 that are indisputable.
I asked for input at WT:JUDAISM, and hope some more editors will give their opinion, because this is not something 3 editors should decide upon. Debresser (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I would welcome any and all additional input. I don't agree however that there is a certain number that is required to post a picture or create a gallery; any editor can do that, as I did here. I do wonder why it was deleted without any prior discussion of the matter. In any case, this current discussion is designed to remedy that omission and I welcome it. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 21:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan
then again it might be in the interest of readers to show a diverse selection, not just those with extra long beards. Sir Joseph (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I agree with this; in fact, I would even show rabbis without any beards. After all, this is a page about Rabbis, not Rebbes, Haredi or Hassidic. They have separate pages dedicated to them. Twelve Manhattan (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Twelve Manhattan